CCMIN051705 - Laserfiche WebLink

Update on City related tennis services and approval of an aqreement with Lifetime Tennis to manaqe operations at the Tennis and Community Park. (SR 05:097) Mr. Wolfe presented the staff report. Mr. Sullivan referred to Mr. Brozosky's previous comment where he pointed out that as part of the General Plan update, Council had directed the Parks and Recreation Commission to work on a Master Plan for all fields in Pleasanton and to determine what the needs are for build out, which included all sports, including tennis. He asked staff to discuss this matter. Mr. Fialho pointed out that Council collectively approved as a priority a Sports Field Master Plan process, which staff is embarking on. One of the recommendations that will be presented to Council is that the Parks and Recreation Commission study it and determine where certain sports facilities are located throughout town. This will be presented to Council in the form of recommendations as part of the General Plan update. Mr. Sullivan asked if these recommendations would be presented to Council at the end of the General Plan update? Mr. Fialho said the recommendations would be part of the General Plan update process. The recommendations would be as broad as possible without being so specific that the hands of this or a future Council are tied. The Master Plan will outline where there are opportunities for open space and parks and how to program them in the future. Mayor Hosterman noted that Mr. Murphy raised a question earlier in the evening about the process that Council goes through in determining needs on a Citywide basis, specifically for sports fields. She believed it was important for the community to understand that Council goes through a process where it identifies the needs for the community, what is available and where the City is falling short, and what is needed to be done to remedy those needs before the City funds these amenities. Mr. Fialho said there was no exact study that was conducted for the Bernal property in terms of determining the exact number of fields that were needed. He noted that a very long and comprehensive public review process began. The review process has gone through various iterations of community meetings and town hall discussions and Parks and Recreation Commission studies. As an outcome, concept plans were derived and what is currently on the table is what Council had discussed and reviewed at its May 12 workshop. As part of the tennis court issue, staff is suggesting Council utilize its experts, which in this instance is the Parks and Recreation Commission. While the Parks and Recreation Commission are stakeholders, this Commission is the Council's objective body to determine whether or not there is a need and if so, how to program it City wide, which is the process that staff is recommending. In response to an inquiry by Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Fialho believed staff and the Parks and Recreation Commission could fast track the discussion for lighted tennis courts and complete it within two to three months. He envisioned the Parks and Recreation Commission having a meaningful discussion and providing a compressive recommendation to Council. If out of this recommendation, the thought is for lighted tennis courts on the Bernal property, staff could bridge these two processes together so that this recommendation would become part of the Specific Plan. Mr. Brozosky wanted to make it clear to the community that Council controls tennis fees and it has the ability to reduce rates for certain hours if it wanted to offer certain programs. Pleasanton City Council 11 05/17/05 Minutes